RkFast Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 True to certain extent, but that is their style. 596224[/snapback] BINGO! Give THAT man a cigar. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I wouldn't pay $300 bucks to see any band. 596228[/snapback] What about $7500? Here's the ticket prices for the Robin Hood benefit at Radio City next month: • $7,500 – Granite: Prime Orchestra seats ($7,000 tax deductible) • Includes pre-party at Rockefeller Center • $5,000 – Marble: Great Orchestra seats($4,500 tax deductible) • Includes pre-party at Rockefeller Center • $2,500 – Amber: Main Orchestra seats/1st Mezzanine ($2,200 tax deductible) • $1,000 – Limestone: Rear Orchestra seats/1st Mezzanine ($800 tax deductible) • $500 – Quartz: Side Orchestra Seats/2nd Mezzanine($400 tax deductible) • $250 – Pyrite: 3rd Mezzanine($150 tax deductible) If I see him, I'll tell The Donald TSW says hi! :w00t: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 The Stones were great (as were U2, McCartney, and Aerosmith). The things that some of you guys complain about amaze me. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I am a bit prejudiced but I thought it was the best halftime show ever, if only because the previous 39 sucked worse and usually far, far worse. I wasn't too thrilled with their choice of three songs but Start Me Up was pretty decent. Sure they ain't what they used to be, and I'm not exactly sure why America's spectacle in Detroit should be showcasing a British rock band from the 60s, but it was probably their 40th anniversary garbage they were trying to exploit and Paul Revere and the Raiders were already booked. Mick hasnt been able to sing (strong) for 20 years but he's still great. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tennesseeboy Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Mick...you gotta know to hold'em, know when to fold'em, know when to walk away..know when to run. Love you...love the band...but maybe its time to fold'em. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
1gap2gap Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 They have always sucked in person. A good studio band but everybody was always too Stoned to know the difference. They sound the same to me in person as they have always sounded. I guess I just neve did enough drugs to enjoy them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SouthernMan Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Mick hasnt been able to sing (strong) for 20 years but he's still great. 596314[/snapback] Can't sing but still great? How do you reckon that? Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't his job title "singer"? That's like saying Josh Reed is a great receiver - can't catch a pass but he runs great patterns. Saying that playing loose and sloppy is "just their style" is about the stupidest thing I can imagine hearing. They're a lousy sounding live band who doesn't give a damn how bad they sound. They know the fans go to be part of an event rather than to hear good music, so I guess they figure why waste their precious time actually rehearsing the tunes when they could be guzzling Jack Daniels and chasing women old enough to be their grandchildren. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I am a bit prejudiced but I thought it was the best halftime show ever, if only because the previous 39 sucked worse and usually far, far worse. I wasn't too thrilled with their choice of three songs but Start Me Up was pretty decent. Sure they ain't what they used to be, and I'm not exactly sure why America's spectacle in Detroit should be showcasing a British rock band from the 60s, but it was probably their 40th anniversary garbage they were trying to exploit and Paul Revere and the Raiders were already booked. Mick hasnt been able to sing (strong) for 20 years but he's still great. 596314[/snapback] The reason for all three of the songs played, Start me up and satisfaction are probably their 2 biggest and most well known hits, and the other was off the new album which they would throw in cause thats why they are touring. They were chosen because they are a big name band, who just released their new album and are on a huge world tour. Typically the act is chosen either because they are from the area, or are a big name act on a big tour at the time. I thought last years show was good because it was the same as this year, 1 band on stage to perform a couple songs. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 The reason for all three of the songs played, Start me up and satisfaction are probably their 2 biggest and most well known hits, and the other was off the new album which they would throw in cause thats why they are touring. They were chosen because they are a big name band, who just released their new album and are on a huge world tour. Typically the act is chosen either because they are from the area, or are a big name act on a big tour at the time. I thought last years show was good because it was the same as this year, 1 band on stage to perform a couple songs. 596356[/snapback] 1. I know why they chose those songs. And Start Me Up would not be one of their two top well known or popular songs even though it is very, very well known. I just thought they were bad, safe, cliched choices by the band. 2. The Stones have been touring for four decades. The fact the Stones are touring has ZERO affect on whether the NFL wants them to play their halftime show. I cannot imagine a scenario where the meeting for the Super Bowl show was based on a list of touring bands and they notice the Rolling Stones are touring and that's why. IMO they did it only because they had a ridiculous attraction to this 40 year anniversary, and mostly because of the titty fiasco last year and they thought by bringing out the Stones they could appease the baby boomer men and part of the women at the same time. I'm glad they did it because halftime shows suck. But it wasnt at all because the Stones were touring, IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
beerme1 Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Bingo. Give that man a cigar. Sorry, but for me, if the music sucks, the show sucks. Mick ain't quite so pretty any more that he can rely on his charisma to carry the band. 596217[/snapback] I have been wathching the Stones for years...what we got last night was pretty mucht the way they have always sounded. It seems people have lost the ability to put anything in context anymore...the music industry went to complete hell, when it started catering to seven year olds... I agree that the Stones have stooped pretty low over the years (playing the Super Bowl halftime show is pretty low) but live, that band still plays as hard as any out there. They didn't rely on back-up singers, fly girls and horns to embelish everything. That was a meat and potatoes rock band out there. I give them credit for not stooping "we are the world" type garbage that the NFL usually goes for. Maybe you would have preferred Aerosmith! I wouldn't pay $300 bucks to see any band. Rock and Roll lost its' soul some years ago. It seems to be getting harder for people to hear what is inspired, and what is pre-fab! 596228[/snapback] Bingo! give Buftex a cigar! The Stones were what they are and I personally enjoyed it. I would also like to mention that the stage was cool. It took me back to the day. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest BackInDaDay Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Another good reason to read TBD. First one was finding out that it wasn't Mike Tyson singing the anthem. Second one was finding out it wasn't five of the original 'Up With People' cast doing the halftime show. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
colin Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 the stones are too damn old to be a rock and roll band. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
USMCBillsFan Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I thought they sucked too, but that's just my opinion. If you liked them then good for you but I gaurantee that probably the majority of this generation didn't care for that half time show... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kelly the Dog Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 This is semi-interesting to me. It seems a lot of articles are saying that Network Censors eliminated two words in the Stones performance. One of them was the obvious "cum" stripped off the end of "you make a dead man _ _ _" in Start Me Up. The other was "rooster" as in rooster (nudge-nudge), from Rough Justice. But this article says Mick and the Stones agreed to not sing them beforehand. I thought, watching it, that he never said "cum" versus it was censored. I suppose I believe that more, otherwise they would have had to make that story and the quotes up out of whole cloth, whereas the other articles, that the Network censored them, would just be shoddy reporting. http://chicagosports.chicagotribune.com/sp...-football-print Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BuffaloBud Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 Speaking of halftime shows, in the Pete Rozell show on the NFL network last week it was mentioned that after the 2nd "Up with People" halftime show Pete said that he never wanted that act again as a halftime show. His intent was that it was too boring. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rubes Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I expect the halftime performances to be mediocre, but what I really can't stand is how the NFL seems to hire people to stand on the field by the stage and jump up and down like they were in a constant state of orgasm. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Poojer Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I am with you on that. If the Bills were involved in the SB and won then the stones would have been the second greatest thing of the day... The Stones were great (as were U2, McCartney, and Aerosmith). The things that some of you guys complain about amaze me. 596301[/snapback] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Dan Gross Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 1. I know why they chose those songs. And Start Me Up would not be one of their two top well known or popular songs even though it is very, very well known. I just thought they were bad, safe, cliched choices by the band. 596375[/snapback] Start Me Up is a stadium staple however. You're likely to hear it at any football game you go to. As for the performance, I really don't feel like getting into the Toe-May-toe Toe-Mah-Toe debate that's going on here.... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Rico Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 I expect the halftime performances to be mediocre, but what I really can't stand is how the NFL seems to hire people to stand on the field by the stage and jump up and down like they were in a constant state of orgasm. 596484[/snapback] They're not hired, per se... they were audition winners. If you were one of the groups (10-12 people or so) chosen, you had to make several practices, lasting 6-8 hrs each (except for the 2 short ones when the Stones were present) and follow some very strict guidelines re: what you can wear & how you had to to act. Then you missed the 1st half waiting in a tunnel for halftime & got sent home afterwards. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
apuszczalowski Posted February 6, 2006 Share Posted February 6, 2006 1. I know why they chose those songs. And Start Me Up would not be one of their two top well known or popular songs even though it is very, very well known. I just thought they were bad, safe, cliched choices by the band. 2. The Stones have been touring for four decades. The fact the Stones are touring has ZERO affect on whether the NFL wants them to play their halftime show. I cannot imagine a scenario where the meeting for the Super Bowl show was based on a list of touring bands and they notice the Rolling Stones are touring and that's why. IMO they did it only because they had a ridiculous attraction to this 40 year anniversary, and mostly because of the titty fiasco last year and they thought by bringing out the Stones they could appease the baby boomer men and part of the women at the same time. I'm glad they did it because halftime shows suck. But it wasnt at all because the Stones were touring, IMO. 596375[/snapback] 1. Start me up not one of there top 2 known songs? Wasn't it used by Microsoft for windows 98 and all over TV at that time? What song besides satisfaction is more widely known/used publicaly? 2. I wasn't saying just because they are doing a tour they were chosen. They released a new record earlier in 2005 and are on probably the years biggest tour. Thats why. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts